SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"We are overjoyed at the ruling, because it once-and-for-all declares that killing prisoners not a part of justice in Connecticut," said Dan Barrett of the Connecticut ACLU.
Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the state's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the planned executions of 11 men on death row, thereby abolishing all capital punishment in the state.
The 4-3 decision came three years after the state passed a law that repealed the death penalty but did not spare those already sentenced to die.
"Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing constitutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.
"For these reasons, execution of those offenders who committed capital felonies before April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," he continued.
The court's decision came in response to an appeal by Eduardo Santiago, a man on death row in Connecticut. While public defenders represented him, the ACLU and its Connecticut chapter filed separate amicus briefs to support his case.
Dan Barrett, the legal director of the Connecticut ACLU, told Common Dreams, "We are overjoyed at the ruling because it once and for all declares that killing prisoners is not a part of justice in Connecticut."
The court concluded that the death penalty violates the state's constitution because of: "the freakishness with which the sentence of death is imposed; the rarity with which it is carried out; and the racial, ethnic, and socio-economic biases that likely are inherent in any discretionary death penalty system."
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the state's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the planned executions of 11 men on death row, thereby abolishing all capital punishment in the state.
The 4-3 decision came three years after the state passed a law that repealed the death penalty but did not spare those already sentenced to die.
"Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing constitutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.
"For these reasons, execution of those offenders who committed capital felonies before April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," he continued.
The court's decision came in response to an appeal by Eduardo Santiago, a man on death row in Connecticut. While public defenders represented him, the ACLU and its Connecticut chapter filed separate amicus briefs to support his case.
Dan Barrett, the legal director of the Connecticut ACLU, told Common Dreams, "We are overjoyed at the ruling because it once and for all declares that killing prisoners is not a part of justice in Connecticut."
The court concluded that the death penalty violates the state's constitution because of: "the freakishness with which the sentence of death is imposed; the rarity with which it is carried out; and the racial, ethnic, and socio-economic biases that likely are inherent in any discretionary death penalty system."
Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the state's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the planned executions of 11 men on death row, thereby abolishing all capital punishment in the state.
The 4-3 decision came three years after the state passed a law that repealed the death penalty but did not spare those already sentenced to die.
"Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing constitutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.
"For these reasons, execution of those offenders who committed capital felonies before April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," he continued.
The court's decision came in response to an appeal by Eduardo Santiago, a man on death row in Connecticut. While public defenders represented him, the ACLU and its Connecticut chapter filed separate amicus briefs to support his case.
Dan Barrett, the legal director of the Connecticut ACLU, told Common Dreams, "We are overjoyed at the ruling because it once and for all declares that killing prisoners is not a part of justice in Connecticut."
The court concluded that the death penalty violates the state's constitution because of: "the freakishness with which the sentence of death is imposed; the rarity with which it is carried out; and the racial, ethnic, and socio-economic biases that likely are inherent in any discretionary death penalty system."